The Coronavirus thread

Poll
2 votes (13.33%)
2 votes (13.33%)
2 votes (13.33%)
1 vote (6.66%)
2 votes (13.33%)
4 votes (26.66%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (6.66%)
1 vote (6.66%)

15 members have voted

April 21st, 2021 at 8:35:03 AM permalink
JCW09
Member since: Aug 27, 2018
Threads: 12
Posts: 847
Quote: ams288
So- a couple of months from now, once every American who wants to get vaccinated has had ample opportunity to do so, do we just let nature take its course and let the antivaxxers fend for themselves? Social Darwinism at work?

Correct!
The virus is over for anyone in the US with a functioning cerebral cortex.
Get vaccinated and the those that don't can fend for themselves.
Anyone wearing a mask in the US come October 1st better also be using lighting rod structures.
You are twice as likely to be hit by lightning than die from Covid after being vaccinated.
Which of course means Ed will definitely be installing lightning rods on his home on wheels.
Def. of Liar - "A Person Who Tells Lies" / "I lied. Deal with it" - ams288
April 21st, 2021 at 8:38:37 AM permalink
ams288
Member since: Apr 21, 2016
Threads: 29
Posts: 12538
Quote: JCW09
Correct!
The virus is over for anyone in the US with a functioning cerebral cortex.
Get vaccinated and the those that don't can fend for themselves.


Sounds good to me.
I get my 2nd shot Saturday.
As soon as mask mandates are lifted, I’m done with them whenever/wherever I don’t have to wear one.
“A straight man will not go for kids.” - AZDuffman
April 21st, 2021 at 4:08:47 PM permalink
fleaswatter
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 3
Posts: 1087
The information below can be found in the "National Center for Biotechnology Information" (NCBI) website NCBI is a part of the US Government's "National Institutes of Health" (NIH). You know, that organization that the flip-flopping little menace Fauci works for.

Posted on the NCBI's website is a study concerning facemasks in the COVID-19 era.

Following is a table from the section: "Physiological effects of wearing facemasks"



Conclusion of the study:

Quote:
The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.



Follow the science
Let's go Brandon
April 21st, 2021 at 4:26:59 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 189
Posts: 18764
Quote:
The presence of an article in PMC does not reflect an endorsement of, or concurrence with, the contents of the article by NLM.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/about/disclaimer/
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
April 21st, 2021 at 4:30:48 PM permalink
Gandler
Member since: Aug 15, 2019
Threads: 27
Posts: 4256
Quote: fleaswatter
The information below can be found in the "National Center for Biotechnology Information" (NCBI) website NCBI is a part of the US Government's "National Institutes of Health" (NIH). You know, that organization that the flip-flopping little menace Fauci works for.

Posted on the NCBI's website is a study concerning facemasks in the COVID-19 era.

Following is a table from the section: "Physiological effects of wearing facemasks"



Conclusion of the study:




Follow the science



Why don't you post a link to the exact article instead of a link to the organization and a random google screenshot.
Oh I know why, because your summary of the paper was completely wrong.

Also, this article is for people who wear a mask for extended periods of time and/or under extreme physical stress. Sorry, putting a mask on to walk through an air-conditioned Walmart for 10 minutes does not count.





Quote: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7558090/

Abstract
In this commentary, we discuss the physiological effects of wearing masks for prolonged periods of time, including special considerations, such as mask wearing among those who engage in exercise training, and concerns for individuals with pre-existing chronic diseases. In healthy populations, wearing a mask does not appear to cause any harmful physiological alterations, and the potentially life-saving benefits of wearing face masks seem to outweigh the documented discomforts (e.g. headaches). However, there continues to be controversy over mask wearing in the United States, even though wearing a mask appears to have only minor physiological drawbacks. While there are minimal physiological impacts on wearing a mask, theoretical evidence suggests that there may be consequential psychological impacts of mask wearing on the basic psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. These psychological impacts may contribute to the controversy associated with wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. After we discuss the physiological impacts of mask wearing, we will discuss psychological effects associated with wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Keywords: masks, pandemic, COVID-19, face covering, physiology, basic phycological needs, exercise


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7558090/

(Here is the full version of the conclusion that you posted):

Quote: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7558090/


7. Conclusions
In otherwise healthy individuals, wearing masks, even for an extended period of time, does not produce any clinically relevant changes in circulating O2 or CO2 concentrations, and does not seem to impact tidal volume or respiratory rate. However, wearing a mask does produce a small increase in breathing resistance caused by the mask material filtering particles and aerosols in the air and any moisture that is trapped in the mask material. One consistently documented negative impact of wearing a mask for a long period of time is an increase in the development of headaches in people with a history of headaches. Yet overall, the virus reduction and therefore potentially life-saving benefits of wearing face masks seem to outweigh the discomforts. The impact of mask wearing on basic psychological needs (autonomy, relatedness, and competence) is likely a contributor to the controversy associated with wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States; however, future research is needed to empirically test this theoretical evidence. It is important to note that this commentary discussed some overarching psychological factors that may contribute to mask-wearing attitudes and behaviors. However, several other factors may also contribute to the decision to wear a mask and would warrant investigation in future research. Some examples include altruism, self-efficacy, risk assessment, need for control or certainty, self-serving bias, perceptions of fairness, ability to engage in hot vs. cold cognition, short-term vs. long-term orientation, restraint vs. indulgence, trust in science, socioeconomic status, education level, personal experience, and other personality or physiological individual differences.

The current commentary focused on the impact of wearing a face mask from an individual-level. It is important to acknowledge that there may be broader associations and implications of wearing a face mask not discussed. For example, there may be meso-level impacts (i.e., medium systems, such as organizational, ethnic, and community), and macro-level impacts as well (i.e., large systems, such as a national economy). To our knowledge, there is currently no research that examines face mask wearing and the impact of more meso-and macro level systems on the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Future research is needed to determine the impacts of wearing cloth masks during everyday activities, higher intensity physical activities, and in special populations, as the COVID-19 pandemic may require this necessity for a longer period of time. Specifically, randomized controlled trials investigating different mask types (different materials, fits, brands) during a variety of activities and measuring the physiological impacts and/or the protective effects for the wearer or others would be helpful for the public. More quality studies from scientists will help support public health officials when they are encouraging or mandating mask wearing. More data continues to emerge supporting the use of masks; for example, one recent study examined the different sources of variation among over 200 countries in per-capita mortality due to COVID-19, and reported that duration of mask wearing by the public was negatively associated with mortality [64]. Thus, masks may be here to stay for the foreseeable future and may not just have application for COVID-19, but for severe flu seasons and for potential future respiratory epidemics/pandemics. Future research should also focus on how we can encourage the better adoption of masks usage and how we can decrease perceptions of discomfort, all while focusing on the global task at hand: controlling and eliminating COVID-19. Future research will need to shed light on effective public health programs (including health education programs) that can maximize mask usage and compliance of mask wearing and explore the physiological and psychological impacts of these programs.



Here is the critical point of the paper that I will quote again so it is clear to all, but I encourage all to read it for themselves on the actual government site (not a misleading screenshot):

Quote: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7558090/

In otherwise healthy individuals, wearing masks, even for an extended period of time, does not produce any clinically relevant changes in circulating O2 or CO2 concentrations, and does not seem to impact tidal volume or respiratory rate. However, wearing a mask does produce a small increase in breathing resistance caused by the mask material filtering particles and aerosols in the air and any moisture that is trapped in the mask material. One consistently documented negative impact of wearing a mask for a long period of time is an increase in the development of headaches in people with a history of headaches. Yet overall, the virus reduction and therefore potentially life-saving benefits of wearing face masks seem to outweigh the discomforts.



Scheid JL, Lupien SP, Ford GS, West SL. Commentary: Physiological and Psychological Impact of Face Mask Usage during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(18):6655. Published 2020 Sep 12. doi:10.3390/ijerph17186655
April 21st, 2021 at 4:32:17 PM permalink
ams288
Member since: Apr 21, 2016
Threads: 29
Posts: 12538
Looks like fleaswatter’s Fauci Derangement Syndrome made him post an oopsie.
“A straight man will not go for kids.” - AZDuffman
April 21st, 2021 at 4:53:43 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 189
Posts: 18764
Although there's lots of reference of other studies on the original article, when I did a search on "cite" I didn't find any cites at all to all the supporting studies. Google scholar shows 2 cites to the article. That's not a very good result as other professionals citing the work generally gives it some prominence.

Cites aren't the end all be all of worthiness. But seeing so little is not impressive.
You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really?
April 21st, 2021 at 4:59:27 PM permalink
Gandler
Member since: Aug 15, 2019
Threads: 27
Posts: 4256
Quote: rxwine
Although there's lots of reference of other studies on the original article, when I did a search on "cite" I didn't find any cites at all to all the supporting studies. Google scholar shows 2 cites to the article. That's not a very good result as other professionals citing the work generally gives it some prominence.

Cites aren't the end all be all of worthiness. But seeing so little is not impressive.



Well for one it was published as a commentary paper.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4789530/
(Guidelines here)


However, even so it is not saying anything like he is claiming that it is saying even in a commentary context....
April 21st, 2021 at 5:36:01 PM permalink
SOOPOO
Member since: Feb 19, 2014
Threads: 22
Posts: 4178
Quote: ams288
So- a couple of months from now, once every American who wants to get vaccinated has had ample opportunity to do so, do we just let nature take its course and let the antivaxxers fend for themselves? Social Darwinism at work?


Yes. Not exactly ‘let nature take its course’, in that medical care will not be denied to the anti vaxxer’s. Where I live ‘every American’ can get one immediately now. Last child gets second shot in a few days. So my family is all done. It is funny that the two groups most likely to refuse vaccines are Trumpers and African Americans. Not often are they aligned....
April 21st, 2021 at 5:43:31 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 135
Posts: 18213
Quote: SOOPOO
It is funny that the two groups most likely to refuse vaccines are Trumpers and African Americans. Not often are they aligned....


Both distrust government.
The President is a fink.